[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#12054: 24.1; regression? font-lock no-break-space with nil nobreak-c
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#12054: 24.1; regression? font-lock no-break-space with nil nobreak-char-display |
Date: |
Sat, 03 Nov 2012 18:56:49 +0200 |
> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 09:25:35 -0700
> Cc: 12054@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> Just why is it that the regexp "[\240]+" does not match this char?
Because, for histerical reasons, 'insert' treats strings such as
"\nnn" as unibyte strings.
> Why should a character-alternative expression care whether the
> representation is unibyte or multibyte? Isn't that a bug?
It's an unfortunate dark corner, due to the ambiguity of what \240
really means in a string.
> How to use octal syntax to match that char?
Why do you need the octal syntax? Why not just use a literal ? Is
that only for the sake of old Emacs versions, or for some other
reason?
> The Elisp manual says clearly that
> "The most general read syntax for a character represents the character code in
> either octal or hex." MOST GENERAL, not most limited and partial.
I see no contradiction or incorrect information in this cited text.
The octal notation does work in your example, it's just that its
semantics is not what you expected. Or am I missing something?
bug#12054: 24.1; regression? font-lock no-break-space with nil nobreak-char-display, Chong Yidong, 2012/11/03